So, as I was sitting
here pondering my existence I began to mull over the idea of
"truth". Now, truth in an everyday since seems like
something we take for granted. Truth is the logical end to a
set of facts and evidence. Or, at least, that is how I have
come to know its definition. We acknowledge that truth must
exist and that our logical end is simply the closest thing we have to
the "truth". So I suppose my definition falls short.

Our perception of truth
is that which we feel or think is closest to reality. And
reality exists. It is impossible to know anything is in fact
true, but it is possible to convince yourself you are as close as you
can be to the truth.

So, why is it that when
we come to the word "spiritual" truth is cast aside?
It is a common argument amongst "spiritual" people these
days that one's own beliefs can be true for them, and another's
beliefs are true for that other person. And that claiming
to know the truth for all people is rude and inconsiderate to other's
"truths".

This baffles me.
If all beliefs are true, then what about the person claiming only his
(or her) belief is true? We have reached a paradox!

If A states that B is
telling a truth, and B states that A is lying, who is in the right?

Reckoning back to my
definition of truth, I stretch to mean also that there is only one
truth, and that our human beliefs in the world "spiritual"
are attempts to become closest. So, it is a lie to say all
beliefs are truth if all are not (at least) identical.

If a person believes
that every individual person's beliefs are true then either that
person must except that each person lives in their own little pocket
of reality, or that the universe changes itself to fit the whims of
each person, or that all beliefs are shots in the dark and therefore,
none of them are true.

This is the view of the
agnostic. The person who believes that if there even
is a god or an eternal answer to our existence, it is so remote and
incomprehensible that any attempt by mankind to find it is futile and
therefore, any attempt is just as good as another. I heartily
agree with this. Without complete knowledge of the universe our
feeble attempts at truth are just that: feeble, weak, and a waste of
our time. Any belief that claims to have found the truth falls
short of the truth.

However, I believe that
there is a cosmic force at work in heavens and that that cosmic force
could contact, and did contact us. We may not have ever been
able to reach It (or Him) but It (or He) certainly could contact
us.

I believe and am
willing to (and have) bet my entire existence that Jesus Christ is
this God incarnate and that He came to the earth, lived among
sinners, suffered and was killed under Pontius Pilate, and by His
return from death redeems and reconciles us mere human beings with
the Almighty, Omnipotent, Omnipresent, and All-Loving God and that
someday he will return as he has promised.

Of course, I may be
false. If so, I am completely wasting my time. But I am
not making this up, nor is this a human attempt to reach to God; this
is God reaching, through Bible, to us. To me. To you. Even
the agnostic cannot disagree when I say that only through God's
attempt to reach humanity, can humanity ever even know about Him.

But what makes the
Bible so special?

Even though the Bible
was written by people, the ultimate author is God. This claim
is not invented by the church, but is the claim the Bible makes for
itself. "All scripture is God-breathed" (Timothy 3:16) God
is an active person in the Bible, over 2,000 times in the Old
Testament there are clauses like "And God spoke to Moses,"
"The word of the Lord came unto Jonah," and "God
said."

Of course, the
mere fact that the Bible claims to be the "Word of God"
does not prove it as such. Many other books make similar
claims.

Unity. The Bible was
written over a period of 1,500 years by more than forty different
people. These authors came from a variety of backgrounds, including
Joshua (a military general from Egypt), Daniel (a Prime Minister in
Babylonia), Peter (A fisherman from Roman Galilee) and Nehemiah (a
cup-bearer from Jerusalem). The books were written in a variety
of places, such as the wilderness (Moses), prison (Paul), exile on
the Greek isle of Patmos (John). The Bible was composed on three
different continents (Africa, Asia and Europe) and in three languages
(Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek). The contents of the Bible deal
with controversial topics. Yet, the Bible is a unit. From beginning
to end, there's one unfolding story of God's plan for salvation for
mankind. This salvation is through Jesus Christ. Jesus himself
testified that He is the theme of the entire Bible.

If you don't that this
is anything special, I challenge you to find ten people from your
local area having similar backgrounds, who speak the same language,
and all are basically from the same culture. Then separate them
and ask them to write their opinion on only one controversial
subject, such as the meaning of life. The unity of the
Bible is the strongest argument for its divine inspiration.

The bible is also an
index to History and archeological record. Until the early
1800's historians knew little about what happened before the days of
Plato and Socrates in Classical Greece. Of course, they saw the
Egyptian ruins and pyramids, but their language was still
unreadable. China was mysterious and foreign and The Sumerians
was known only from the crumbling ziggurats that dotted what is now
Iraq. The Bible was general labeled by scholars as another
Mythological account and its ancient references to cities long ago
were thought of as fanciful. But as newer clues surfaced in
regards to the ancient cultures of the Middle East, it was found that
the Bible was in fact very, very historically accurate. It
described battles that were also mentioned on the walls of Thebes in
Egypt etc. The ancient peoples called the Philistines and the
Hittites were for centuries thought to have been made up by Bible
authors, but it was discovered that both peoples truly existed.
Just within the last ten years, Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor
during Christ's later years was proven to be a historical figure when
article of his was found in Greece. The Bible is an accurate
historical index to the archeological record.

So, back to the
original topic, how do we know the Jesus' teachings are true?
Well, I suppose, we don't. But I would think we have three options:
Jesus was insane and he was just rambling and rambling, Jesus was a
liar and did it for personal gain, or Jesus was in fact genuine.
When someone claims to be God, these are the only options.
I am sure that countless maniacs have claimed to be God, as weird as
that is. Few, however, make logical arguments. Jesus
never studied to be a rabbi; he only did what was required of any
young man. However, he was able to discuss religion with temple
priests at age twelve and even "amaze" them with his words,
he could gather crowds from hundreds of miles away and discuss the
most heated topics in knowledgeable (albeit radical) ways, and he
never left someone without an answer. He was not a crazy
person; he was perfectly sane and well aware of what he was doing.

Was he lying? If
he were lying I would guess that he would try get more out of it.
Jesus was the man who washed his follower's feet, who challenged the
authority, who suffered and died in the most humiliating way.
Even when the city of Jerusalem welcomed him as a triumphant king he
still (in under a week) drove the same people out of the temple in a
rage, and by their hands was crucified. If he was lying, he did
it all wrong. And his message of hope and love and forgiveness
would have died with him.

The only option I see
left is that Jesus Christ is indeed God Incarnate and that the Bible
is truth and that through Christ's sacrifice all people can
know God. All people, aren't they the ones taking
shots in the dark looking for God? They are never going to find
him that way.

The author would like to thank you for your continued support. Your review has been posted.